MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050207623 · doi:10.1021/jp710434y

Metastability of MCM-41 and Al-MCM-41

2008· article· en· W2050207623 on OpenAlexafffund
Colin Peter Guthrie, Eric J. Reardon

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry A · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMesoporous Materials and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMCM-41CrystallinityDissolutionAmorphous solidMesoporous materialBET theorySolubilityMaterials scienceScanning electron microscopeGibbs free energyMolecular sieveMetastabilitySpecific surface areaQuartzChemical engineeringAnalytical Chemistry (journal)MineralogyChemistryCrystallographyAdsorptionPhysical chemistryMetallurgyChromatographyOrganic chemistryComposite materialThermodynamicsCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The apparent stability of MCM-41 and Al-MCM-41 in water was appraised in a series of solubility experiments. MCM-41 is a siliceous, mesoporous material of hexagonal symmetry and exceptionally high surface area first synthesized in 1992. The dissolution experiments were carried out at several solid/water ratios: 1/200, 1/100, and 1/75. Results indicated that MCM-41 and Al-MCM-41 are more soluble than amorphous silica at ambient temperatures. Using standard thermodynamic data, a minimum Gibbs free energy of formation of -847.9 kJ/mol for MCM-41 was calculated compared to -848.85 kJ/mol for amorphous silica and -856.3 kJ/mol for quartz. X-ray diffraction (XRD) analyses of recovered solids indicated a progressive loss of crystallinity in MCM-41 and Al-MCM-41 over the 79 day dissolution experiment. BET nitrogen surface area analyses of recovered solids revealed no appreciable change in the surface area of either material after 79 days of reaction in water. Field emission scanning electron microscope (SEM) images taken of the 79 day MCM-41 sample showed some degradation of the initial structure-fine, worm-like particles.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry ASame topicMesoporous Materials and CatalysisFrench-language works237,207